Is This The Final Nail In The Coffin For...
News1 min ago
ABH Crown court
Hi, I was with friends at a nightclub when a bloke accused my friend of staring at his girlfriend, my friend ignored it and we carried on to the bar. The bloke followed us to the bar and got aggressive so my friend pushed him away, I saw he had gathered up a few pals so I felt surrounded and threatened and swung a punch and missed. A few scuffles kicked off and I swung 2 more punches that missed.
I was escorted out and arrested for ABH. When bailed I spoke to my friends and one of them told me he had hit the same man with a bottle!
I returned for bail and was charged with ABH section 47, the injury was a cut on the head and 4 or 5 stitches.
I pleaded not guilty at the hearing and it will be taken to crown court.
The man and his girlfriend have made statements that say it was unprovoked and I picked bottle up and smashed it on his head. There is one other witness but they just saw a scuffle and me being aggressive afterwards.
I have at two good witnesses to say I swung a punch and missed.
My friend has said he will make a statement and own up. I hope he does!
The cps said the CCTV is very poor quality and doesn't show much.
They both picked me out of an id parade as well, as I was the only one arrested.
My girlfriend and I have spoke to my friend and he told us both he did it, so if he doesn't own up she could be a witness to what he said in front of her.
Can any one give me advice of what to expect or what I can do?
I already have a solicitor but just want other opinions.
I have no previous not even a caution, good character, shotgun certificate holder, and sole provider to my family.
Thanks in advance.
I was escorted out and arrested for ABH. When bailed I spoke to my friends and one of them told me he had hit the same man with a bottle!
I returned for bail and was charged with ABH section 47, the injury was a cut on the head and 4 or 5 stitches.
I pleaded not guilty at the hearing and it will be taken to crown court.
The man and his girlfriend have made statements that say it was unprovoked and I picked bottle up and smashed it on his head. There is one other witness but they just saw a scuffle and me being aggressive afterwards.
I have at two good witnesses to say I swung a punch and missed.
My friend has said he will make a statement and own up. I hope he does!
The cps said the CCTV is very poor quality and doesn't show much.
They both picked me out of an id parade as well, as I was the only one arrested.
My girlfriend and I have spoke to my friend and he told us both he did it, so if he doesn't own up she could be a witness to what he said in front of her.
Can any one give me advice of what to expect or what I can do?
I already have a solicitor but just want other opinions.
I have no previous not even a caution, good character, shotgun certificate holder, and sole provider to my family.
Thanks in advance.
Answers
1 to 14 of 14
Hi nemo
If you were NOT legally represented I would not hesitate to say that you need to inform the police ASAP of what your friend said to you and your partner and that you can name two witnesses that may help your defence for a charge of ABH.
However, I am mindful that your solicitor is in possession of ALL the facts and should be qualified to advance and...
If you were NOT legally represented I would not hesitate to say that you need to inform the police ASAP of what your friend said to you and your partner and that you can name two witnesses that may help your defence for a charge of ABH.
However, I am mindful that your solicitor is in possession of ALL the facts and should be qualified to advance and...
18:27 Fri 09th Mar 2012
exdc, no my solicitor told me not to say anything "keep my mouth shut". she said lets get his statement when we need it. My family are telling me to go and make a statement or get him to make one to the police. or should I wait until the court case? Don't forget im still being accused of it.
Really appreciate people that don't even know me are willing to read my post and try and help me out.
Really appreciate people that don't even know me are willing to read my post and try and help me out.
Hi nemo
If you were NOT legally represented I would not hesitate to say that you need to inform the police ASAP of what your friend said to you and your partner and that you can name two witnesses that may help your defence for a charge of ABH.
However, I am mindful that your solicitor is in possession of ALL the facts and should be qualified to advance and protect your rights and give solid advice for a defence strategy in further legal proceedings. But remember the Caution, it may HARM your DEFENCE if you do not mention when questioned, or mention NOW anything you may later rely on in COURT etc. I am also mindful that although you did not physically 'touch' the complainant you still may be liable for other offences such as Public Order offences which can still be committed inside of a nightclub and is this some thing your solicitor is considering.
Contact the solicitor ASAP and explain your concerns and that you really need an explanation of whats going on and why.
If you were NOT legally represented I would not hesitate to say that you need to inform the police ASAP of what your friend said to you and your partner and that you can name two witnesses that may help your defence for a charge of ABH.
However, I am mindful that your solicitor is in possession of ALL the facts and should be qualified to advance and protect your rights and give solid advice for a defence strategy in further legal proceedings. But remember the Caution, it may HARM your DEFENCE if you do not mention when questioned, or mention NOW anything you may later rely on in COURT etc. I am also mindful that although you did not physically 'touch' the complainant you still may be liable for other offences such as Public Order offences which can still be committed inside of a nightclub and is this some thing your solicitor is considering.
Contact the solicitor ASAP and explain your concerns and that you really need an explanation of whats going on and why.
exdc, Thanks for your thorough aswer you have obviously took the time to really think about my situation.
I will contact my solicitor monday morning and express my concern and remind her of the caution wording. Considering the caution, i am surely better off speaking up sooner rather than later. But in reality will it harm my defence if i hold out till the trial. I am aware of the puplic order offence but i feel as if i performed an attempted pre-emtptive strike while i believe is classed as self defence.
Should the statements be made to the police? or to my solicitor to use in court? in your opinion?
I may also have a magistrate as a good charecter reference.
I will contact my solicitor monday morning and express my concern and remind her of the caution wording. Considering the caution, i am surely better off speaking up sooner rather than later. But in reality will it harm my defence if i hold out till the trial. I am aware of the puplic order offence but i feel as if i performed an attempted pre-emtptive strike while i believe is classed as self defence.
Should the statements be made to the police? or to my solicitor to use in court? in your opinion?
I may also have a magistrate as a good charecter reference.
This is a bit of a long story but bear with me...
When I was in police custody, I had always asked for a duty solicitor.
I asked someone if I would be out any quicker if I didn't wait for the solicitor, but she she said no it doesn't work like that because it all had to be recorded on my custody record. I agreed to wait for the solicitor.
When the investigating officer was ready she took me into an
"OUT OF ORDER" interview room, my solicitor was there (although I didn't know who she was at the time) and the officer told her to wait outside she wanted to introduce herself.
She did, she ALSO told me that there is clear CCTV of me swinging a bottle, she told me there were four witness statements indicating I had "bottled" the victim,one being a sober independent witness, and that I had a good record so if I own up I could walk out with a caution.
(Was this a breech of my rights?).
She then took me into interview, I asked "where was my solicitor!" she replied "no, you changed your mind. If you want one you will be waiting a long time".
(she was there waiting for me!)
I agreed to go it alone because I thought id be in there longer, so the interview started, NO COMMENT. Halfway through, the custody Sargent
INTERRUPTED THE INTERVIEW holding my custody record, "where's the solicitor" it was stopped and it was clear she was in trouble. I then got to speak to a solicitor who told me to no comment the official interview.
What do you make of that? any technicality's to pull them up on?
When I was in police custody, I had always asked for a duty solicitor.
I asked someone if I would be out any quicker if I didn't wait for the solicitor, but she she said no it doesn't work like that because it all had to be recorded on my custody record. I agreed to wait for the solicitor.
When the investigating officer was ready she took me into an
"OUT OF ORDER" interview room, my solicitor was there (although I didn't know who she was at the time) and the officer told her to wait outside she wanted to introduce herself.
She did, she ALSO told me that there is clear CCTV of me swinging a bottle, she told me there were four witness statements indicating I had "bottled" the victim,one being a sober independent witness, and that I had a good record so if I own up I could walk out with a caution.
(Was this a breech of my rights?).
She then took me into interview, I asked "where was my solicitor!" she replied "no, you changed your mind. If you want one you will be waiting a long time".
(she was there waiting for me!)
I agreed to go it alone because I thought id be in there longer, so the interview started, NO COMMENT. Halfway through, the custody Sargent
INTERRUPTED THE INTERVIEW holding my custody record, "where's the solicitor" it was stopped and it was clear she was in trouble. I then got to speak to a solicitor who told me to no comment the official interview.
What do you make of that? any technicality's to pull them up on?
"But in reality will it harm my defence if i hold out till the trial"
Well, its beyond the scope of a forum for me to explain crim law with regard to inferences / silence till trial, but this was a very very tactic used by defence solicitors to claim their client were simply and only acting on defence advice
but
"To avoid the drawing of an adverse inference, some defendants will state that they remained silent because they were advised to do so by their legal advisor. The defendant's statement that he was silent on legal advice is not hearsay provided that the purpose is limited to explaining why the defendant decided to remain silent. However, such a course will not necessarily avoid the application of section 34. In R v Hoare and Pierce [2004] EWCA Crim 784 the Court of Appeal held that when such an explanation is put forward, a jury should consider whether it was reasonable for a defendant to rely on such advice.
This principle was further developed in R v Beckles [2005] 1 WLR 2829 in which the Court of Appeal set out a two stage test for juries to consider before drawing an adverse inference:
Did the defendant genuinely rely on the legal advice, i.e. did the defendant accept the advice and believe that he was entitled to follow it? and
Was it reasonable for the defendant to rely on the advice? By way of example, a defendant may be acting unreasonably if he relied on the legal advice to remain silent because he had no explanation to give and the advice suited his own purposes.
Reasonableness does not depend on whether the advice was legally correct or whether it complied with the Law Society's guidelines. R v Argent [1997] Crim.L.R. 449 CA and R v Roble [1997] Crim.L.R. 449, CA".
Well, its beyond the scope of a forum for me to explain crim law with regard to inferences / silence till trial, but this was a very very tactic used by defence solicitors to claim their client were simply and only acting on defence advice
but
"To avoid the drawing of an adverse inference, some defendants will state that they remained silent because they were advised to do so by their legal advisor. The defendant's statement that he was silent on legal advice is not hearsay provided that the purpose is limited to explaining why the defendant decided to remain silent. However, such a course will not necessarily avoid the application of section 34. In R v Hoare and Pierce [2004] EWCA Crim 784 the Court of Appeal held that when such an explanation is put forward, a jury should consider whether it was reasonable for a defendant to rely on such advice.
This principle was further developed in R v Beckles [2005] 1 WLR 2829 in which the Court of Appeal set out a two stage test for juries to consider before drawing an adverse inference:
Did the defendant genuinely rely on the legal advice, i.e. did the defendant accept the advice and believe that he was entitled to follow it? and
Was it reasonable for the defendant to rely on the advice? By way of example, a defendant may be acting unreasonably if he relied on the legal advice to remain silent because he had no explanation to give and the advice suited his own purposes.
Reasonableness does not depend on whether the advice was legally correct or whether it complied with the Law Society's guidelines. R v Argent [1997] Crim.L.R. 449 CA and R v Roble [1997] Crim.L.R. 449, CA".
1 to 14 of 14
Latest Posts
Crosswords10 mins ago
ChatterBank11 mins ago
Other Sports13 mins ago
ChatterBank21 mins ago
Camping & Caravan Magazine Jan 2025...
Crosswords30 mins ago